Captain's Quarters -

While the cut-rate Betray-Us ad confirms it, the NY Slimes has been a fringe left rag and birdcage liner for as long as I remember...it's nothing new.

I stopped using that rag in the late 80's...my wife's canary hasn’t had hemorrhoids since…

Does this not qualify a Pro-Petraeus organization equal rights and price?

How many other liberal ads got this kind of discount? I bet it wasn't the first time the NYT gave out generous discounts.

Does the Democrat party have to count this as a political contribution?

Could anyone imagine 6 years ago that one of the primary interest groups in the Democrat Party would be taking out ads calling members of our military traitors?

JAT: Does this not qualify a Pro-Petraeus organization equal rights and price?

No. The NYT is a privately-held company and they can sell their services to whomever they choose for whatever price they can get (subject, I suppose, to various laws about equal opportunity). If the NYT wants to give moveon.org a full page, it seems to me that this is their right. It's a free country.

HOWEVER, I don't EVER want to hear anymore horses**t about how "unbiased" the NYT is. They've made it clear by their actions that they slant heavily liberal.

Oh, and lefty trolls: please spare us the obligatory rants about Fox News. We've heard it many times before and could probably write your posts ourselves. Call me when Fox sells air time to a conservative organization for a 60% discount.

"Call me when Fox sells air time to a conservative organization for a 60% discount."

How about when they give a free hour for Petraeus to sell his case to the base? That's essentially the same thing.

I doubt that the NYT is too perturbed by criticism from the right-wing; it's nothing new. I disagree with the ad (it was childish) but not with the business' right to sell ad space at whatever price they please.

Ed: This is a family discount. Seriously, I agree with you that The NY Times was foolish.

fox gives air time to conservative organizations and calls it "news". same with the wall street journal, washington times, new york post, etc.

hannity practically fellated the swift boat liars for weeks on end. weren't they a political advocacy group, same as move on?

Oh, and on another tack that I haven't seen brought up before.

If Petraeus is a traitor, who exactly is he selling the US out to? I think we all have a hunch based on comments by some other luminaries of the left to go down this path like Carter or Mearsheimer and Walt...

Cap'n:

If you think the NYSlimes (okay...okay, I'm playing that game, too) has been a mess during Pinch's tenure, have Humberto Fontoya tell you about the NYT in the days of Che Guevara, or even further back to the days of Walter Duranty.

Paper of Record? On what planet?

hmmm.... according to wing nut sources, move on paid 65k when everyone else pays more. okay, difference there of +/- 70k. meanwhile, bush admin officials say war will cost $2billion and iraqi oil will pay for it while the real cost balloons to half a trillion. difference there of $498 billion +/- and counting. where's your outrage over that?

60% off of open rate is probably something of a discount, but their ad revenues and lineage have been declining so fast that only a sucker would pay anything close to open rate any more.

Still, Macy's and their other big advertisers may look at their own discounts as insufficient now that a one-time customer for a political ad (which traditionally receive NO discount from newspapers) qualifies for a big rate cut.

The only restriction on what newspapers charge for advertising rates is the state requirement that all candidates for the same office receive the same rate scale. I believe most states have some similar law - but it doesn't usually apply to non-election advertising.

Still amazing how just the fact that conservatives actually get air time AT ALL on a network causes leftist punks to scream "bias"!
these days the only way petraeus can get a word in edgewise past the likes of barbara boxer, loretta sanchez, and obama is to go on a network where--surprise!--he actually gets to speak.

Mathis says the newspaper tries "to keep our advertising columns as open as possible" and "there are many instances when we've published opinion advertisements that run counter to the stance that we take on our own editorial pages."  As an example of how the Times is open to all points of view in advertisers,  Mathis points out that on September 11, 2007, "we published a full-page advertisement from Freedom'sWatch.org, an organization whose view is opposite of MoveOn.org."

Freedom's Watch  spokesman Matt David, however tells me  the group was charged "significantly more" than MoveOn.org for its ad. The organization says it plans to run a response to the MoveOn.org NYT ad in the Times, "and we plan to demand the same ad rate they paid," David says.

 

you people will believe anything. all this is pure b.s. nobody knows what moveon paid for the ad, and the nyt is not going to tell because it is nobody's effing business.

rush, sean, bill, ann, michelle and company get paid millions to smear democrats every day. the double standard here is equal parts comical and staggering.

If you think the NYSlimes (okay...okay, I'm playing that game, too) has been a mess during Pinch's tenure, have Humberto Fontoya tell you about the NYT in the days of Che Guevara, or even further back to the days of Walter Duranty.

I believe one can argue that it was ideologically blinded ignorance during the Duranty era that led to the NYT parroting the Soviet line. They wanted to believe what the Soviets were selling through their agents in the west.

I don't think anyone can honesty claim that the NYT is ignorant of what they have been doing the last few years. The mission is to take down the Republican party and *nothing* is offlimits as long as it looks like it might work.

essucht, if you will admit the same is true of fox as you allege of the nyt, then maybe we can get somewhere...

rush, sean, bill, ann, michelle and company get paid millions to smear democrats ...

Yeah right, they smear Democrats by quoting them. And they don't pretend to be News organizations. Is the distinction too difficult for you to grasp? english teacher is lower case all the way and an embarrassment to the teaching profession.

Further proof that Jayson Blair's fraud was not an anomaly.

His fabrications were useful to the NY Times editors and management where if external forces had not revealed the fraud he'd probably have been promoted. No difference for the moveon.org ad exception being it wasn't on the editorial page or pimped as "news" on the front page as usual.

Of course, the Clinton Kool-Aid drinkers take issue with General Petraeus using broadcast media as further venue for his report! I guess that puts the lie to the Dims anxiously waiting to hear Petraeus report. Now that it has arrived how dare FoxNews enable the military leader who compiled it to present it without Couric / Williams / Schieffer DNC spin. It's just not fair if they can't control the man's freedom of speech with a blackout of anything but the Socialist party line on the Old Media networks.

essucht, if you will admit the same is true of fox as you allege of the nyt, then maybe we can get somewhere...

Huh? As studies have shown Fox and ABC* are the two most balanced major media outlets.

The NYT is one of the most biased of all the major media outlets.

*Fox marginally to the right of center ABC marginally to the left.

Further proof that Jayson Blair's fraud was not an anomaly.

Considering all the media scandals over the last few years - Rathergate, Boston Globe rape allegations, TNR/Beauchamp, etc etc etc how anyone believes that MSM fraud is rare just isn't paying attention.

If any other industry delivered as much bad product as the MSM does, the Democrats would be calling for federal oversight.

"Huh? As studies have shown Fox and ABC* are the two most balanced major media outlets."

how's the weather in la la land?

You guys who rant against Fox... two words... DON'T WATCH! If you don't have a channel changer, pull the plug! Railing against conservative broadcasts shouldn't be a problem... the leftie loons have more than the right do. If you think that the Fox guys smear democrats then what do you call the Moveon.org ad against Gen. Patraeus?

english teacher.. I really hope you aren't - you'd be a disgrace to the teaching profession. Put down the Kool-aid and get a grip! Who cares how much Moveon paid for the ad... the whole bloody point is - It shouldn't have been run! It was a disgrace! However... considering the source and the medium... Why am I surprised!

Ed, the so-called "open rate" for a full-page ad in a major newspaper is like the asking price on a house - it's negotiable. FYI, Freedom Watch (a conservative group) ran an ad on 9-11-2007 in the NYT that they paid less than the suggested retail price on also.

my only problem with timothy mcveigh is that he didn't blow up the new york post, the wall street journal, and fox news.

how's the weather in la la land?

You mean where the NYT's collective mind is located? I hear the forecast is for dense smug with a possible downpour of insanity at press time.

It is amazing how leftists just can't handle information that hasn't been pre-processed by the MSM for them...

i was going to talk about the republican candidates, but if you call people faggots, then you gotta go to rehab.

english teacher

I suggest you make better use of your stress leave.

english teacher said

essucht, if you will admit the same is true of fox as you allege of the nyt, then maybe we can get somewhere...

All these outlets--which, by the way, all claim to be unbiased, impartial, objective, blah blah, blah--are nothing but shills for left-wing causes. And yet the left just keeps screeching about FOX because it's the one news outlet that doesn't toe the Democratic Party line.

Starfleet Dude said:

FYI, Freedom Watch (a conservative group) ran an ad on 9-11-2007 in the NYT that they paid less than the suggested retail price on also.

Freedom Watch's Executive Director said today that he didn't the same discount that MoveOn did. He'll be running another ad this week and he'll be asking for the MoveOn rate. Let's see if the NYT gives it to them.

I agree with you all guys. New york times is resposible for IRAQ mess (starting with Judith Miller) and if close it down (may be using an Executive Order)everything will be fine in Iraq

english teacher: hmmm.... according to wing nut sources, move on paid 65k when everyone else pays more. okay, difference there of +/- 70k. meanwhile, bush admin officials say war will cost da-dee, da-da, da-da

Impressive use of the Chewbacca Defense. 8' tall Wookiee ... 2' tall Ewoks ... Kashyyyk, Endor ... I got it. Makes sense.

Jason, keep in mind that MoveOn might well be charged more for running the very same ad on 9/11/2007, which obviously would be a day the NY Times would be expected to sell more papers.

english teacher said:

"hannity practically fellated the swift boat liars for weeks on end. weren't they a political advocacy group, same as move on? "

Ah, the squirrels are coming out of the woodwork to defend their boyfriend Punch, I see.

As for the "Swift Boat liars", prove they weren't telling the truth. No one had credibly done that.
Please cite credible sources. Key word: Credible.

Simply calling them "liars" ain't gonna cut it. The only people I've seen calling them "liars" are the Kos Kids like you and Cyclops, and Media Matters.

Kerry never sued them for libel, did he? Seems to me if they weren't telling the truth, he'd have a hell of a lawsuit.

Del,

The fact that many of the swift-boaters had glowing things to say about Kerry, for years, until they were actively paid to oppose him? That's called 'credible evidence' that people are lying.

To add to Del Dolemonte's post:

Kerry could not sue the SwiftBoat veterans because to do so would have made Kerry's hidden military records subject to discovery.

If that had happened we'd know why Kerry refuses to reveal his military record, the reasons for his less than honorable discharge and how he managed to get the Peanut Carter administration to have that altered.

All I can say with regard to "english teacher" is if any still wonder why the skools are screwed up stop wondering.

english teacher says:

"my only problem with timothy mcveigh is that he didn't blow up the new york post, the wall street journal, and fox news.

So because you disagree with their views, the people who work at those organizations should be blown up with high explosives and killed? How tolerant and progressive of you.

I would strongly suggest that you seek immediate mental therapy you extremist prick. Its zealots like you who force me send my kids to private schools.

This issue has become sadly overblown. The ad side of the nyt publishes rates, which can be negotiated down by any party that wants to buy ad space. The better you negotiate, the better your rate.

If moveon started negotiating from the non-profit line card, it seems to me that they could very well have gotten the rates that are being claimed here--without any hanky-panky going on.

conservatives are "godless".

conservatives wake up every day thinking of ways to commit "treason".

the best way to talk to a conservative (if you must) is with a baseball bat!

Eh, where do you "teach"?

i seriously don't think you should be allowed around children.

MoveOn could have gotten a much bigger discount if they were smarter. I am sure the pro-war Republicans would have paid for the ad, since they were the only ones that benefited it.

The MoveOn ad was a complete waste no matter how much they paid for it. There was no target audience except the choir, and it motivated opposition to their stance. It was pure political masturbation. Apparently it all felt very good to MoveOn and their ilk, but if they had bothered to look up from the mirror, they might have noticed they were not having political intercourse with anyone except themselves. Anyone else seeing it was just compelled to avert their eyes. They would be better off taking that activity behind closed doors where nobody else has to watch.

On the other hand the right is only too happy to whip themselves into a righteous fervor exclaiming "Pay no attention to the war behind the curtain! Look at these idiots over here!"

only one canoli, don't you recognize that these are parodies of comments by republican spokes skank ann coulter? of course, i am sure you and all of captain ed's readers stood together and vociferously denounced coulter's remarks when they were made. am i right?

I'm a tad relieved to hear it. She's not a thoughtful writer and I just don't follow her. If you did a search you'd find that in fact the Cap'n and some of the commenters here actually have been critical of Coulter. I agree that she frequently doesn't add anything worthwhile to the political discussion. But then neither do you.

No english teacher, you are not right. You are left-far left. More importantly, you are just another defeatist who can't see past the next election.

You want to surrender in Iraq when Iraqis are united in their fight against al Qaeda and Sunnis are fighting alongside Americans?

Brilliant, simply brilliant. You want to surrender Iraq to Iran and al Qaeda so your party can win an election. Pathetic.

And english teacher, you are no Ann Coulter. Ann has balls. And she loves her country more than her party.

And you're oddly incapable of doing a search while assuming I supported Ann Coulter's comments.

An English teacher, you say?

"conservatives are "godless".

conservatives wake up every day thinking of ways to commit "treason".

the best way to talk to a conservative (if you must) is with a baseball bat!"

Hey stupid, it's lying punk ass Rats like you that cause ignorant Americans registered democratic for nearly 20 years like myself to NEVER vote democratic again. It took seconds to see the errors of my ways and to recognize who the real enemy is. It's pussies like you. Take your transference and shove it up your ass. You are not even American , you are a stupid democrat.

Get the hell out of my Country you traitorous Pseudo-American Rat.

ed, i respect you. but the indignation over this ad is comical. do you decry limbaugh? hannity? why just stop at coulter? if you (collective you) want civility from democrats, maybe you should practice it a little more rigorously.

look at your readers. i play parody with coulter's remarks, and they don't even get it. they deny that republicans have dirty hands in the deterioration of our discourse. i say that is bull shit. republicans started this mess. if you can't take it, don't dish it out.

I knew somehow I was to blame for this country's major newspaper cozying up to Moveon.org. This morning I woke up feeling guilty ... not entirely sure why until this very moment. It's not the NYT that is at fault. It's ... us.

nyt ran an ad from freedom's watch. what's your point?

How much did the Times charge 'em?

Why do thinking people still subscribe to the NYT?

The only way to get their attention is a massive subscription cancellation movement.

Eng teacher , you are a G D Liar. Discourse? You and your democrat media have been wailing and throwing tantrums for years now , Bimbo Boxer begging a crowd at a University to be put back in POWER. My family and relatives are no doubt mostly democratic since one works for a D congressman and a few others in city Councils etc. One even had the nerve to say that "we need to get rid of his ass" (President Bush) while in church at my uncles funeral.(Congressman in attendance).

You sick people are a disgrace and I thank God that I became informed a couple of weeks before the 2004 election. And I didn't know who the hell Hanity , Limbaugh or Fox News were. I was just an American minding my own business and traitors and criminal frauds made their presence know and I instantly began to inform myself beginning with who the hell is that SOB who just disrespected my President on national TV, CNN. It was one John Fraud Kerry and he belong to the democratic Party. End of story.

"if you (collective you) want civility from democrats, maybe you should practice it a little more rigorously."

What? Civility? From traitors? I don't think so. The democratic leadership in my opinion should drug out and shot. Who the hell are you trying to kid? You can't apologize for treasonous behavior and say , "Oh we really didn't mean it" Bull Shit!

Democrats are the Party of perpetual fraud who believe that they and only should should be in charge of running this Country, just like they tell themselves "that Social Security belongs to us and we need to get back to where we belong, in Power."

Democrats belong in PRISON next to the 85% of felons who would have voted for FRAUD KERRY. You can continue to molest our children with your democrat propaganda , it's most likely the only reason you teach if you are a teacher at all,LIAR.

The LA Times calls nonstop and sends High School kids with sob stories to sell their trash. They have no shame.

et, okay if i call you that? Do you even read the blog posts before you start typing away? Your 7:04 comment suggests that you never understood the topic.

This thread falls far below the usual standards of civility that characterize this blog. I expect it of the lefties, but not of the conservatives. Don't sink to the moonbat level!

/Mr Lynn

ooc, your 7:31 post suggests you do not understand that i reject the phony right wing framing of the topic. the move on ad points out that pertraeus is a flip flopper. he failed to deliver the 100,000 iraqi cops he was in charge of training and which he said would be ready in 2005. how much longer are we supposed to give bushco to solve this?

So, if you get soldiers killed and maimed in a stupid war, you get a pass but if you publish a criticism of Petreaus in the NY Times, you get slammed.

Come on, death and newspaper advertising are two different things, andarguing about one while ignoring the other suggest a sort of disconnect.

"What? Civility? From traitors? I don't think so. The democratic leadership in my opinion should drug out and shot. Who the hell are you trying to kid? You can't apologize for treasonous behavior and say , "Oh we really didn't mean it" Bull Shit! Democrats belong in PRISON next to the 85% of felons who would have voted for FRAUD KERRY. You can continue to molest our children with your democrat propaganda, it's most likely the only reason you teach if you are a teacher at all,LIAR."

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury - I offer the above as Exhibit A - A perfect example of exactly how far the Republican Party has moved away from main stream America, why it will continue to marginalize itself into complete irrelevance, why Republicans lost the 2006 mid-terms despite a structural advantage in the Senate election, and a snapshot of its future as it careens at maximum velocity down a highway to single party Democratic government hell with a possible 60 vote plurality in in the Senate in 2009.

Officer could you please describe accident scene: -
"There were no skid marks and no evidence of any attempt to slow the Republican vehicle as it flew off the cliff at high speed. There were no survivors. Parts were sold off to 3rd parties.

There is still no evidence that MoveOn got a deal.

Freedom Watch says they paid more, but then don't disclose how much. Once they do, we can compare the status of the two organizations (i.e. are they both not for profit? etc), the size of the ads, their placement, color or b/w, etc.

Until that happens, you all are getting worked up over something that might not be true.

Why does everyone pick on english teacher's moniker when starfleet_dude's is the weirder one?

I think english teacher is possibly not a teacher of English but is in fact English AND a teacher, hmmm? Or possibly he/she doesn't teach English as in language arts and literature but instead is a teacher of english, as in put some "english" on that ball ("the spin given to a ball by striking it on one side or releasing it with a sharp twist").

But starfleet_dude? I have no idea. I know starfleet is from Star Trek but I'm not sure if he/she believes he/she is actually in starfleet or is just a big trekkie/fan kind of person.

Anyway, these are unrelated thoughts. As to the topic at hand, I haven't read the NY Times regularly since William Safire retired and Maureen Dowd became tedious and repetitive. I used to like reading Tom Friedman's columns as well but then you had to pay to read him and I decided against that. Plus they have a poor sports section.

As to the ad? They should run more and do it for free. It's a public service. Pushes the moveon crowd closer and closer to the ninth circle of hell (h/t Dante).

Cyclops said:

"The fact that many of the swift-boaters had glowing things to say about Kerry, for years, until they were actively paid to oppose him? That's called 'credible evidence' that people are lying."

First of all, I notice that you couldn't answer my question, or actually cite a specific example of the Swifties actually "lying" about Kerry. All you can do is attack their characters for previously supporting the man.

In the meantime, I would love to hear specific examples of how the Swifties lied about Kerry in Vietnam. Remember, Kerry had 7 or 8 Swifties siding with him, most likely the men on his boat.

But there were many times that number, including his command officers, who had a different opinion.

As I recall, there were maybe 2 or 3 (out of many more) who had previously supported Kerry when he was running "locally", for his seat representing his State of Masachusetts.

My guess is that the laser focus of your hatred is that Swiftie Adrian Lonsdale fellow, who once endorsed Kerry for his MA seat, but later decided Jean-Claude couldn't be trusted with national security as President, especially after the 9/11 attacks. Try insultimg someone else.

As you may recall, the majority of the successful attacks on that day came thru the ultra thin "airport security" of Kerry's hometown airport in Beantown. I'm sure that changed a few minds, especially when it was revealed that Teddy Kennedy and Kerry had been advised on the PC security at Logan Airport and just laughed it off.

Remember-the 9/11 perps cased the entire system for a LONG time before they pulled off their attacks, and the weakest links in the airport security system were in blue states. They chose Logan because it was run by political hacks.

It appears to me that tempers are being frayed on both sides. While I vigorously disagree with "English Teacher", she has a right to vent her opinion without ad homenim attacks from conservatives. If she crosses over the line and engages in those tactics, she should be ignored and not encouraged to continue a verbal barrage. 'Nuff said.

"While I vigorously disagree with "English Teacher", she has a right to vent her opinion without ad homenim attacks from conservatives."

You're a lot of fun aren't you?

j/k

The point about the discount for the MoveOn.org as is this: If MoveOn.org received a deep discount on the ad, a discount that another political organization did not receive, then The New York Times Corporation just made an in-kind political contribution to MoveOn.org and may be in violation of federal campaign laws. Campaign finance laws do not cover editorial page positions - any news organization can air their editorial positions all they want. What they cannot do is contribute, either by writing a check or by providing the equivalent in free, or reduced prices, for advertising.

THAT is the issue here - not whether the paper has an editorial position to the left or the right, or what Sean Hannity said on an opinion show - but whether The New York Times Corporation just violated federal campaign laws. I bet their general counsel's office has just ordered in a case of Maalox and is putting together another presentation on "What Not To Do Because It is Illegal".

The question about the Swift Boaters and Fox is only relevant to the NYT IF

Fox put the Swift Boaters on and refused to allow the Kerry campaign to come and rebut the charges.

I seem to recall that the Kerry campaign did respond, but rather late and then - arrogantly and not substantively

Captain Ed, you so have to read this. And do a post on it:

After the disgusting ad posted which "coincidentally" happened to be published on Sept 10, the same day Petraeus was testifying, the NYT tries to cover up the discount by saying that discounted ad rate was open to anyone giving them a 7 day window to publish any day the NYT saw fit.

If that was the case why did the very last line of the ad text say:

... [LINK]

Ed, you were completely wrong about this. You like truth, right? You like, when you villianize an institution, to do it on the basis of real events, right? Not made-up ones?

http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/240566.php

http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=8724

You were completely and utterly wrong. Other conservative bloggers have already recanted. Are you going to allow your misinformation to harden in the minds of your readers? Is that honest? Or are you going to recant?

An apology is probably due as well, but no one expects that kind of civility.